Validity and fairness of physical ability tests for predicting performance in craft jobs: Correction to Reilly, Zedeck, and Tenopyr

Abstract

Reports an error in the original article by Richard R. Reilly, Sheldon Zedeck, and Mary L. Tenopyr (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1979, Vol. 64, No. 3, pp. 262-274). In the Results section of Experiment 2 several results were reported incorrectly. The corrected results are provided. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1980-26872-001 .) Problems relating to performance, accidents, and turnover in outdoor telephone craft jobs stimulated 2 experiments aimed at developing and validating a physical test battery. Based on job analysis results, a battery of 9 measures was administered to a sample of 128 Ss (83 males and 45 females) in Exp I. A 2-test battery (dynamic arm strength and reaction time), valid for predicting job task performance and turnover, was selected. Regression equations for males and females were not significantly different. Exp II included a sample of 210 Ss (132 males and 78 females). A 3-test battery consisting of a body density measure, a balance test, and a static strength test was selected based on relationships with training performance. No significant differences were found in the regression equations for males compared to females. The Exp II battery was also significantly related to field performance, training completion, and accidents and was valid for the Exp I criteria. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)